> Robert Brovdi began the war as a civilian grain trader and now leads Ukraine's unmanned systems forces, having pioneered many modern drone tactics on the way up from being an enlisted volunteer.
Inspirational. One capable rando can make a real difference.
> The solution was a market and "currency" for units to buy equipment and supplies. Brigade-level units purchase drones directly from the manufacturers using the "Brave" marketplace. The currency in the marketplace is points that units earn from video-confirmed kills of Russians. Drones flow to the most effective units, those units work closely with the manufacturers, and they can choose from a range of options depending on their current mission and Russian tactics.
Get out of the way, Pentagon, and let the best grunts do procurement. How does the US military industrial complex react to that idea?
I guess that can work if the major battles are concentrated only at a few point. But what happens when it is spread out along a huge frontline? You can't really prioritise for "effective" if you also need to prioritise for "necessity"?
I expect they would tell the units that they get more points for results in zone A than in zone B, and allow teams to move (or move their drone operations) towards zone A.
They seem flexible enough to do that, tweaking the system fairly frequently.
Seems like a way to purposly implement Goodhart's Law in a war bureaucracy. Like, the law is a warning but neoliberals might read it differently I guess...
Yes, it is a proxy war between NATO and Russia. But have they really pumped 600 billion dollars? I thought it was around 100 to 150 billions, so far, which isn't that much for the west.
The European Union and its member states have provided a total of €215.2 billion in overall support to Ukraine and its people since the start of Russia's war of aggression "Since the start of Russia's war of aggression, they have provided €215.2 billion in support for Ukraine and its people.", as reported by the Consilium of the European Union.
As of mid-2026, the United States Congress has made available $195 billion in total spending related to the war in Ukraine.
Not hard, if you pump 600 billion [1] into one of the most corrupt [2] and poorest countries [3]
Google AI:
[1] The European Union and its member states have provided a total of €215.2 billion in overall support to Ukraine and its people since the start of Russia's war of aggression "Since the start of Russia's war of aggression, they have provided €215.2 billion in support for Ukraine and its people.", as reported by the Consilium of the European Union.
As of mid-2026, the United States Congress has made available $195 billion in total spending related to the war in Ukraine.
[2] Ukraine scored 36 out of 100 points in the latest Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), ranking 104th out of 180 countries. While the country’s rating has improved in recent years, ongoing wartime procurement and defense-sector scandals point to continued high-level corruption risks.
Behind most EU candidates: The average score for EU candidate countries is 39. Nations like Montenegro (46), Moldova (42), and Albania (40) are all perceived as cleaner than Ukraine.
[3] Ukraine is one of the poorest countries in Europe by both individual and national wealth standards, largely due to historical factors and the massive economic toll of the full-scale war. Global Standing: On the global stage, Ukraine ranks 94th
"let's send this stuff from the warehouse to Ukraine" "let's say it's a value of $x even though it's close to the use-by date" and then come you and write that someone sent $x, and expect anyone to believe that.
And you even write that $x makes hard things easy. Hope much did the US pay to lose against Iran? Winning against anyone for the same sum isn't easy.
We need just a few more sanctions against Russia and we will have a Regime change. The regime change will come, but likely different than we thought - AfD in Germany, Farange in the UK and LePen in France.
Russia is not entitled to swallow any neighbour that looks at them funny. Neither are we required to stand by and do nothing for the fear of the possibility that Russia will become more belligerent.
Russia thought the Ukrainians wouldn't put up much resistance and launched a war of conquest to prevent Ukraine from joining the EU. It's failed in it's gamble and it has to experience the consequences.
Russia often reforms only after military defeat exposes how badly the state and army are failing: Crimea pushed the Great Reforms, Japan helped trigger 1905, and Afghanistan plus the Cold War strain fed the Soviet collapse. Loss forces changes that peace lets the system avoid. And maybe we'll get a conciliatory government not an aggressive one doubling down.
This year, so far and among other things, we’ve had an illegal war against Iran, an illegal blockade against Cuba, hundreds of civilians murdered in the Caribbean, the murder of a head of state, the abduction of another. As well as the continued support for Zionist genociding. No meaningful protest from Western regimes, Western media, and most of the enthusiasts here. Might makes right is the whole of the law—as long as it’s the West‘s.
Joining the EU doesn't usually involve the mass murder and/or incarceration of a whole class of people. Joining the EU brings obvious prosperity while the Soviet Union locks you in to a government structure doomed to economic failure.
Yeah there was something with Cuba. America attempted the same thing in Cuba as the 2014 Ukraine rebellion Russia fomented and equipped, but instead of failing in 8 years, it utterly failed immediately and the Americans didn't decide to double down on their failure and actually invade like Russia has. America then allowed Cuba to be a Soviet ally, for everything except for forward deployed nuclear weapons which it then removed from Turkey.
Russia is about to show what it's really made of. If it can't win against Ukraine's scaled-up defence industry, then I gotta say, all these doomsayers and West-Putin equivocators will look pretty dumb.
Germany had 4000 tanks during the cold war. It has now 350, 200 in working condition.
She has ammunition for two days, now down to one because they gave a lot to Ukraine.
Denmark has give all her ammunition to Ukraine.
There is little of equipment left. And nobody willing to fight in the West. For what? For a crumbling economy? Unaffordable house prices? Collapsing social systems because two many immigrants draw from them? (Germany, UK)?
> The regime change will come, but likely different than we thought - AfD in Germany, Farange in the UK and LePen in France.
Unfortunately you are correct, as Ruski Mir's greatest export is corruption.
The West suffers from the Paradox of Tolerance, and is generally unprepared to deal with Moscow's political operations.
The good news is that those are just three countries, and the EU is made of many more.
The crazy thing to me is that all that Europe wants is for Moscow to join us in the 21st century, and just stop murdering your neighbors.
Apparently this is too much to ask of the old guard. But, we all went through this and eventually became "normal countries." Russia will as well one day, and the Russian people will be one of the greatest beneficiaries of this maturation.
The "Monaco Battalion" (Batysalion Monako) is not an official military unit, but rather an ironic nickname given by Ukrainian media (such as Ukrainska Pravda) to a network of wealthy Ukrainian oligarchs, politicians, and businesspeople. This group relocated to the French Riviera to sit out the war.
Not really, no. Per-capita Switzerland is rich, well fortified, and isn't being conquered to punish it for attempting to join a trade bloc. And free countries don't really like their neighbours being conquered by aggressive imperialist authoritarian states.
I'm interested in the criteria that you judge a country of not deserving of aid, especially since it is in the interests of the donor countries that Ukraine not be conquered.
It's actually pretty hard. The most expected scenario after pumping hundreds of billions into a cleptocracy would be for most of that money to get stolen with little to show for it. Not to build a machine that stopped Russia. What Ukraine authorities managed to do, given the country's state (the coruption is truly mindboggling), is remarkable.
This article was pretty light on the sheer amount of Western aid provided to Ukraine.
The whole thing is a cluster. A ton of Ukrainian people *are* ethnically Russian, particularly in the east. They aren’t exactly going to be ok under a NATO backed regime that’s hostile to Russia.
Russia shouldn’t tolerate NATO troops stationed on one of its longest land borders.
I guarantee if the Chinese worked out a deal to station troops in northern Mexico we wouldn’t be happy.
Unfortunately the conflict has also revealed a disgusting double standard in Western media.
Ukrainians are “European Christians” with names, hopes and dreams.
Not like *those* people who are collateral damage. Burn the village to save it, blah blah.
1. Wanted in 2008, did not get an invitation, and that was the end of it. Russia invaded in 2014 because of deepening Ukraine-EU trade ties.
2. Most of Eastern Europe has been in NATO for over 20 years and has not seen any permanent stationing of "NATO troops", whatever that means. And the forces that were in Western Europe have seen dramatic decrease since the 1980s, around 5-10x across all key categories (personnel, weapons, etc).
London has a ton of ethnic Russians who do fine under a NATO regime that's hostile to Russia.
Russia had long tolerated NATO on it's borders in Latvia and Estonia and is now OK with Finland. NATO is really a defensive alliance that has never attacked any of the countries it borders.
The whole Russia NATO thing is mostly BS to justify it's imperial expansion which has been a thing for centuries.
It’s literally impossible for Russia to defend a ground invasion staged from Ukraine. Coalition( or whatever they call it) troops could be dining in Red Square within 24 hours.
Well, I said NATO had never invaded bordering countries. Iraq doesn't border and also members of NATO can do their own thing. I think NATO did get roped into involvement in Serbia by the US but it's not their mission.
Re. ground troop dining in Red Square, firstly Latvia is also about six hours drive from Moscow so going via Kyiv wouldn't make much difference. Secondly there is the small business of the worlds largest nuclear arsenal and many troops to put off invaders. And thirdly many countries border NATO countries and seem to manage to deal with it without freaking out and invading others.
48 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 48.3 ms ] threadInspirational. One capable rando can make a real difference.
Get out of the way, Pentagon, and let the best grunts do procurement. How does the US military industrial complex react to that idea?
I guess that can work if the major battles are concentrated only at a few point. But what happens when it is spread out along a huge frontline? You can't really prioritise for "effective" if you also need to prioritise for "necessity"?
They seem flexible enough to do that, tweaking the system fairly frequently.
For example, see https://mod.gov.ua/en/news/updated-e-points-system-military-....
non-stop ads on the DC metro
adverts visible off of 66
bribes to congressmen, generals, etc.
The European Union and its member states have provided a total of €215.2 billion in overall support to Ukraine and its people since the start of Russia's war of aggression "Since the start of Russia's war of aggression, they have provided €215.2 billion in support for Ukraine and its people.", as reported by the Consilium of the European Union.
As of mid-2026, the United States Congress has made available $195 billion in total spending related to the war in Ukraine.
Google AI:
[1] The European Union and its member states have provided a total of €215.2 billion in overall support to Ukraine and its people since the start of Russia's war of aggression "Since the start of Russia's war of aggression, they have provided €215.2 billion in support for Ukraine and its people.", as reported by the Consilium of the European Union.
As of mid-2026, the United States Congress has made available $195 billion in total spending related to the war in Ukraine.
[2] Ukraine scored 36 out of 100 points in the latest Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), ranking 104th out of 180 countries. While the country’s rating has improved in recent years, ongoing wartime procurement and defense-sector scandals point to continued high-level corruption risks.
Behind most EU candidates: The average score for EU candidate countries is 39. Nations like Montenegro (46), Moldova (42), and Albania (40) are all perceived as cleaner than Ukraine.
[3] Ukraine is one of the poorest countries in Europe by both individual and national wealth standards, largely due to historical factors and the massive economic toll of the full-scale war. Global Standing: On the global stage, Ukraine ranks 94th
Also, supplying Ukraine is a cheap way to prevent similar invasions from happening in the future.
And you even write that $x makes hard things easy. Hope much did the US pay to lose against Iran? Winning against anyone for the same sum isn't easy.
Russia is not fighting Ukraine, Russia is fighting NATO. And we are in dangerous territory.
Emmanuell Todd predicted this and this is not a person to be taken lightly (e.g. predicting the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1976 as a 26 years old PhD student): https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2024/11/how-the-west-was-...
We need just a few more sanctions against Russia and we will have a Regime change. The regime change will come, but likely different than we thought - AfD in Germany, Farange in the UK and LePen in France.
Russia thought the Ukrainians wouldn't put up much resistance and launched a war of conquest to prevent Ukraine from joining the EU. It's failed in it's gamble and it has to experience the consequences.
Russia often reforms only after military defeat exposes how badly the state and army are failing: Crimea pushed the Great Reforms, Japan helped trigger 1905, and Afghanistan plus the Cold War strain fed the Soviet collapse. Loss forces changes that peace lets the system avoid. And maybe we'll get a conciliatory government not an aggressive one doubling down.
Yeah there was something with Cuba. America attempted the same thing in Cuba as the 2014 Ukraine rebellion Russia fomented and equipped, but instead of failing in 8 years, it utterly failed immediately and the Americans didn't decide to double down on their failure and actually invade like Russia has. America then allowed Cuba to be a Soviet ally, for everything except for forward deployed nuclear weapons which it then removed from Turkey.
Denmark has give all her ammunition to Ukraine.
There is little of equipment left. And nobody willing to fight in the West. For what? For a crumbling economy? Unaffordable house prices? Collapsing social systems because two many immigrants draw from them? (Germany, UK)?
Good luck mate. I am not going to fight.
Emmanuel Todd: "Russia has won the war, the Ukrainian army is in its death throes" https://www.youtube.com/shorts/2zI3vzLKmao
Or use pass paywalls clean plug-in.
Unfortunately you are correct, as Ruski Mir's greatest export is corruption.
The West suffers from the Paradox of Tolerance, and is generally unprepared to deal with Moscow's political operations.
The good news is that those are just three countries, and the EU is made of many more.
The crazy thing to me is that all that Europe wants is for Moscow to join us in the 21st century, and just stop murdering your neighbors.
Apparently this is too much to ask of the old guard. But, we all went through this and eventually became "normal countries." Russia will as well one day, and the Russian people will be one of the greatest beneficiaries of this maturation.
The "Monaco Battalion" (Batysalion Monako) is not an official military unit, but rather an ironic nickname given by Ukrainian media (such as Ukrainska Pravda) to a network of wealthy Ukrainian oligarchs, politicians, and businesspeople. This group relocated to the French Riviera to sit out the war.
Have the efforts of the Ukrainian anti corruption agencies and the defence of them by the Ukrainian public made any impression on you?
I'm interested in the criteria that you judge a country of not deserving of aid, especially since it is in the interests of the donor countries that Ukraine not be conquered.
The whole thing is a cluster. A ton of Ukrainian people *are* ethnically Russian, particularly in the east. They aren’t exactly going to be ok under a NATO backed regime that’s hostile to Russia.
Russia shouldn’t tolerate NATO troops stationed on one of its longest land borders.
I guarantee if the Chinese worked out a deal to station troops in northern Mexico we wouldn’t be happy.
Unfortunately the conflict has also revealed a disgusting double standard in Western media.
Ukrainians are “European Christians” with names, hopes and dreams.
Not like *those* people who are collateral damage. Burn the village to save it, blah blah.
2. Most of Eastern Europe has been in NATO for over 20 years and has not seen any permanent stationing of "NATO troops", whatever that means. And the forces that were in Western Europe have seen dramatic decrease since the 1980s, around 5-10x across all key categories (personnel, weapons, etc).
Russia had long tolerated NATO on it's borders in Latvia and Estonia and is now OK with Finland. NATO is really a defensive alliance that has never attacked any of the countries it borders.
The whole Russia NATO thing is mostly BS to justify it's imperial expansion which has been a thing for centuries.
You can say NATO has never engaged in an offense war, but a majority of its members did participate in the Iraq war as the Coalition of the Willing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_of_the_willing_(Iraq...
It’s literally impossible for Russia to defend a ground invasion staged from Ukraine. Coalition( or whatever they call it) troops could be dining in Red Square within 24 hours.
Re. ground troop dining in Red Square, firstly Latvia is also about six hours drive from Moscow so going via Kyiv wouldn't make much difference. Secondly there is the small business of the worlds largest nuclear arsenal and many troops to put off invaders. And thirdly many countries border NATO countries and seem to manage to deal with it without freaking out and invading others.
shillbots out on both sides, and hard